arXiv:1510.04733v2 [math.NT] 7 Jun 2016 of hs flclebdigdimension embedding local of those n o any for and hoe 1.1. Theorem definitions.) and notation full for 2 ucin n o aeo oainw en h mt e ohave to set empty the define we notation of ease for and function, eutflosfo oolr . ftefloigterm (Each theorem. following the their of removing thus 1.2 fields, Corollary finite for from same surface. follows t the smooth is result prove ambient obstruction we local an paper this on this field, than In true perfect more infinite be an no would over have that this proved must since curve point, the any requirement: at obvious an is There Wood. and Vakil of fin t conjecture over In stabilization schemes hypersurface quasi-projective [Poo13]. for a dynamics results arithmetic embedding distr prove and point-counting to siev EW15] including The BK12, subjects, of [BDFL10, theorem. range curves smoothness a Bertini to adapted classical and the of version field htpstv rbblt sgvnb pca auso eafunctions, zeta of values con special adequately predicts. by are heuristic given subscheme point-by-point is the probability of positive singularities that and dimension the of value some for if Conversely, eto fasot scheme smooth a of section d lim →∞ ie uv,we osteeeitsm mohsraeit whic into surface smooth some exist there does when curve, a Given [Poo04 in introduced first was sieve point closed geometric Poonen’s ogl paig h bv hoe asta,wt oiieprob positive with that, says theorem above the speaking, Roughly P F n q # and , ADMHPRUFCSADEBDIGCRE IN CURVES EMBEDDING AND HYPERSURFACES RANDOM euto lmnadKemn eod epoeacnetr fVak of conjecture a prescrib prove a having we sections Second, hypersurface a of field Kleiman. probability finite asymptotic and the proving Altman unspe by an of field, in perfect result curve a a over embedding obstruction only to the obstruction obvious the that show Abstract. { H H ∈ H e Z,d ≥ Z,d Let 0 h e fdegree of set the euePoe’ lsdpitseet rv w needn results independent two prove to sieve point closed Poonen’s use We let , | X X easot ushm of subscheme smooth a be V ∩ UFCSOE IIEFIELDS FINITE OVER SURFACES e H ete(oal lsd ustof subset closed) (locally the be X ssot fdimension of smooth is # otiigagvnsubscheme given a containing H e Z,d ehave we d e 1. OEHGUNTHER JOSEPH yesrae in hypersurfaces in Introduction V hnif Then . dim 1 ( V P e + ) F n q m max fdimension of e e P − F n ≥ q { 1 dim V } m htcontain that V = hntelmti 0. is limit the then , hs lsdpit r exactly are points closed whose saansot,poie that provided smooth, again is ( dnme fsingularities. of number ed V ζ t ed,a ela oprove to as well as fields, ite aou faBertini-type a of nalogue e X eol btuto [KA79]. obstruction only he dimension + ) ie mohsraeis surface smooth cified − btoswti aiisof families within ibutions V m a ic enapplied been since has e ζ ladWo nthe on Wood and il nnt yohss The hypothesis. infinite ( e , m eo niae zeta a indicates below w agn directions tangent two tcnb embedded? be can it h } blt,ahypersurface a ability, hc swa naive a what is which rle.Furthermore, trolled. Z lmnadKleiman and Altman Z m < 1) + i ae,w s it use we paper, his lsdsubscheme closed a Let . opoeafinite a prove to ] −∞ 1 ehave we , is,we First, . Y e V ζ e Section see ; V e = ( m X − ∩ e ) Z . , 2 JOSEPH GUNTHER
Remark. In the case where the subscheme V is smooth, Theorem 1.1 gives the central theorem of [Poo08]. While our result is more general, its proof is ultimately inspired by that paper. Over an infinite perfect field, under similar hypotheses on local embedding dimensions, the existence of smooth hypersurface sections was proved in [KA79, Theorem 7]. After sub- mitting this paper for publication, the author learned that Theorem 1.1 was independently obtained by Wutz in her recent thesis [Wut14, Theorem 2.1].
Corollary 1.2. Let C be a reduced quasi-projective curve over Fq, not necessarily smooth, irreducible, or projective. Then there exists a smooth r-dimensional scheme over Fq in which C can be embedded if and only if the maximal ideal at each closed point of C can be generated by r elements. If C is projective, the smooth scheme can be chosen projective as well. Proof of Corollary 1.2 from Theorem 1.1. Necessity is clear. For sufficiency, consider C em- Pn Pn Pr bedded in Fq for some n. If n = r, we’re done. If n
Corollary 1.3. Let C be a reduced, quasi-projective curve over Fq with only simple nodes and cusps. Then C can be embedded in some smooth surface over Fq. Remark. In his thesis [Ngu05, Theorem 1.0.2], N. Nguyen proved a different embedding result, answering the question of when a smooth variety X over Fq of dimension m admits Pn a closed immersion into Fq , for n ≥ 2m + 1. In that case, the only obstruction is also an obvious one, though of an arithmetic nature: embedding fails exactly if, for some e ≥ 1, X Pn has more closed points of degree e than Fq itself. Theorem 1.1 also applies to higher-dimensional schemes, not just curves. In particular, Pn we obtain some appealing probabilistic corollaries about subschemes V ⊂ Fq if we take Pn ¯ X = Fq and Z = V in the theorem. Pn Corollary 1.4. Let V ⊂ Fq be an arbitrary subscheme. Then the probability that a random hypersurface containing V will be smooth is ¯ 1/[ζPn−V¯ (n + 1) ζ(V¯ ) (n − e)], if max{dim((V )e)+ e} < n, e e e Y 0, otherwise. RANDOM HYPERSURFACES AND EMBEDDING CURVES 3
Remark. By rationality of the zeta function [Dwo60], the probabilities in Theorem 1.1 and Corollary 1.4 are always rational numbers. P3 2 3 2 Example. Let C be the rational curve defined in Fq by w = 0 and y z − x + x z = 0. −1 1−q1−s −1 −s −1 −s 2−s 3−s Then ζV1 (s) = 1−q−s , ζV2 (s) =1 − q , and ζX−V (s) = (1 − q )(1 − q )(1 − q ). P3 So, for example, the probability that a hypersurface in F2 containing C will be smooth is −1 15 [ζX−V (4) · ζV1 (2) · ζV2 (1)] = 128 . Remark. We should caution that just because an asymptotic probability in Theorem 1.1 or Corollary 1.4 is 0, this does not in general rule out the existence of any smooth hypersurface sections containing the given scheme. For example, the non-reduced scheme cut out by 2 A3 P3 y = 0 and z = 0 in Fq ⊂ Fq is contained in smooth affine hypersurfaces of arbitrarily high degree (such as those given by z − yd = 0); however, in accordance with Theorem 1.1, the proportion of smooth hypersurfaces decreases to 0 (exponentially with the degree, in fact). P3 Conversely, a curve in Fq with a point of local embedding dimension 3 is contained in no smooth hypersurfaces at all. The second main theorem of this paper is also an application of Poonen’s sieve; in Section 4, we prove a recent conjecture of Vakil and Wood on hypersurface sections with a prescribed number of singularities. Before stating it, we provide some motivation. Let X be a smooth, quasi-projective, m-dimensional scheme over Fq. Roughly speaking, [Poo04, Theorem 1.1] showed that a hypersurface section of X has zero singularities with probability 1 . At the other extreme, [Poo04, Theorem 3.2] showed that a section has ζX (m+1) infinitely many singularities with probability 0. It is then natural to ask how the probabilities are distributed across the remaining possible numbers of singularities (one, two, etc.): 1 +?+? + ... =1. ζX (m + 1) To answer this question, we need a little notation. Let X be a finite-type scheme over F ∞ n F n q, and define ZX (t) = n=0 |(Sym X)( q)|t . Then a standard computation shows that −s n ZX (q ) = ζX (s), as defined in the next section. The points of Sym X correspond to P n formal sums of n points on X, with possible repetition; let Sym[ℓ]X be the natural subset comprising just those sums supported on exactly ℓ geometric points. Analogously, define [ℓ] ∞ n F n [ℓ] [ℓ] −s ZX (t) = n=0 |(Sym[ℓ]X)( q)|t , and let ζX (s) = ZX (q ). Based on their own motivic results about the Grothendieck ring of varieties, Vakil and Wood conjectured the following generalizationP of Poonen’s Bertini theorem [VW15, Conjecture A]. Pn Theorem 1.5. Let X be a smooth m-dimensional subscheme of Fq , ℓ ≥ 0 an integer, and Pn Hd the set of degree d hypersurfaces in Fq . Then #{H ∈ H | X ∩ H has exactly ℓ singular geometric points} ζ[ℓ](m + 1) lim d = X . d→∞ #Hd ζX (m + 1) Remark. This gives the distribution of probabilities over all possible numbers of singularities, in terms of a natural decomposition of the zeta function: 1 ζ[1](m + 1) ζ[2](m + 1) + X + X + ... =1. ζX (m + 1) ζX (m + 1) ζX (m + 1) 4 JOSEPH GUNTHER
Example. What is the probability that a plane curve is singular at exactly one geometric 2 ζ[1](3) 3 2 P2 [1] q +q+1 X (q −1)(q −1) point? For X = F , we have ζ (s)= s , and so the probability is = 6 . q X q −1 ζX (3) q F 21 For 2, this probability is 64 . Coincidentally, by [Poo04, Section 3.5], this is the same as the probability that it’s smooth; thus over F2, a plane curve is precisely as likely to be smooth as it is to have exactly one singularity. Over any other finite field, a random plane curve is more likely to be smooth than singular. Acknowledgments. I thank Johan de Jong, Raymond Hoobler, and Joe Kramer-Miller for helpful conversations.
2. Notation and Conventions Let X be a scheme of finite type over Z. The zeta function of X is defined as 1 ζ (s)= , X 1 −|κ(P )|−s P ∈X closed pointsY where κ(P ) is the residue field of P . The product converges for Re(s) > dim X ([Ser65, Theorem 1]). In the particular case where X is a scheme of finite type over Fq, we have that
∞ 1 |X(F n )| ζ (s)= = exp q q−ns . X 1 − q−s deg P n P ∈X n=1 ! closedY X Following [Poo04] and [Poo08], we wish to measure the density of sets of homogeneous Fq-polynomials, within both the space of all such polynomials and just those vanishing on a Pn given subscheme of Fq . We’ll often speak informally of these densities as probabilities. Let F S = q[x0, x1,...,xn], let Sd be its degree d homogeneous part, and let Shomog = d≥0 Sd. For any P ⊂ Shomog, we define the density of P to be S #P ∩ S µ(P) = lim d d→∞ #Sd if the limit exists. Pn To define the density relative to a closed subscheme Z of Fq , let Ihomog denote the homo- geneous elements of S that vanish on Z, and Id the degree d part. For P ⊂ Ihomog, we define its density relative to Z as #P ∩ Id µZ(P) = lim d→∞ #Id if the limit exists. Note that Theorem 1.1 is equivalent to a statement about µZ; we’ll use this notation in its proof. Theorem 1.5 is technically a statement about µ, but we will simply speak of prob- abilities in its proof. For f ∈ Sd, let Hf = Proj(S/(f)) be the associated hypersurface. All intersections and closures are scheme-theoretic, and a subscheme means a closed subscheme of an open subscheme. We use the convention that a product over an empty set is 1, and that the dimension of the empty set is −∞. Following [Har77, Section II.7], for a morphism Y → X and a sheaf of ideals I on X, we write I ·OY for the inverse image ideal sheaf in OY . For the definition of a simple singularity on a curve (also known as an ADE-singularity), we refer the reader to [GK90]. RANDOM HYPERSURFACES AND EMBEDDING CURVES 5
3. Embedding Dimension Theorem Let X and Z be as in Theorem 1.1, with I ⊂ S the vanishing ideal of Z. We define the local embedding dimension e(P ) of a closed point P of a scheme to be the minimal number of generators for the maximal ideal mP in its stalk, or equivalently by Nakayama’s Lemma, m m2 Pn Pn the dimension of P / P over the residue field κ(P ). In this section, = Fq , and the local embedding dimension of a point P will always mean as a point of V = X ∩ Z. For ease of comparison, we parallel the structure of [Poo08].
3.1. Singular Points of Low Degree. Fix any c such that S1Id = Id+1 for all d ≥ c; for example, choose a finite homogeneous generating set for the ideal, and let c be the maximal degree of its elements. The following interpolation lemma is [Poo08, Lemma 2.1]. Lemma 3.1. Let Y be a finite subscheme of Pn. Then the restriction map 0 n 0 φd : Id = H (P , IZ (d)) → H (Y, IZ · OY (d)) 0 is surjective for d ≥ c + h (Y, OY ).
Lemma 3.2. Suppose m ⊂ OX is the ideal sheaf of a closed point P ∈ X. Let Y ⊂ X be 2 the closed subscheme whose ideal sheaf is m ⊂ OX . Then for any d ∈ Z≥0, (m−e(P ))deg P 0 q , if P ∈ V, #H (Y, IZ · OY (d)) = (m+1)deg P (q , if P 6∈ V. 0 Proof. Because X is smooth, the space H (Y, OY (d)) has a two-step filtration whose quo- 0 tients have dimensions 1 and m over the residue field κ(P ). Thus #H (Y, OY (d)) = (m+1)deg P 0 q . If P ∈ V = X ∩ Z, then H (Y, OZ∩Y (d)) has a filtration whose quotients 0 have dimensions 1 and e(P ) over κ(P ); if P 6∈ V , then H (Y, OZ∩Y (d)) = 0. Taking global sections for the exact sequence
0 → IZ · OY (d) → OY (d) → OZ∩Y (d) → 0 (taking global sections is exact on a zero-dimensional Noetherian scheme) gives
0 0 #H (Y, OY (d)) #H (Y, IZ · OY (d)) = 0 #H (Y, OZ∩Y (d)) q(m+1)deg P /q(e(P )+1)deg P , if P ∈ V = (m+1)deg P (q , if P 6∈ V.
For S a scheme of finite type over Fq, let S
Pr = {f ∈ Ihomog | X ∩ Hf is smooth of dimension m − 1 at all P ∈ X µ (P )= (1 − q−(m+1)deg P ) · (1 − q−(m−e)deg P ). Z r ∈ − e ∈ P (XYV ) Proof. Let X of dimension m − 1 at Pi exactly if the restriction of f to a section of OYi (d) is zero. 0 S By Lemma 3.1, the restriction map φd : Id → H (Y, IZ · OY (d)) is surjective for d >> 0, and as this is a linear map, its values are equidistributed. So µZ(Pr) just equals the fraction 0 n of elements in H (P , IZ · OY (d)) which are nonzero when restricted to each Yi, which is constant. Thus, by Lemma 3.2, s 0 #H (Yi, IZ · OYi (d)) − 1 µZ (Pr)= 0 #H (Yi, IZ · OY (d)) i=1 i Y = (1 − q−(m+1)deg P ) · (1 − q−(m−e)deg P ). ∈ − e ∈ P (XYV ) Corollary 3.4. If dim(Ve)+ e < m for all e, then 1 lim µZ(Pr)= . r→∞ ζX−V (m + 1) ζVe (m − e) e Y Proof. The products in Lemma 3.3 are the reciprocals of the partial products in the definition of the zeta functions. For convergence, we need m − e > dim(Ve) for each e ([LW54, Corollary 5]), which is our hypothesis exactly. Corollary 3.5. If dim(Ve)+ e ≥ m for some e, then limr→∞ µZ(Pr)=0. Proof. By [LW54, Corollary 5], ζVe (s) has a pole at s = dim(Ve), so the product in Lemma 3.3 converges to 0. This proves the second part of Theorem 1.1. 3.2. Singular Points of Medium Degree. d−c Lemma 3.6. Let P ∈ X be a closed point with deg P ≤ m+1 . Then the fraction of f ∈ Id such that X ∩ Hf is not smooth of dimension m − 1 at P equals q−(m−e(P ))deg P , if P ∈ V −(m+1)deg P (q , if P 6∈ V. 0 Proof. Let Y be as in Lemma 3.2. Then #H (Y, IZ · OYi (d)) is given by the same lemma, which serves to calculate the desired fraction by Lemma 3.1. Define the upper density µ¯Z(P) as the lim sup of the expression used to define µZ. Lemma 3.7 (Singularities of medium degree). Define d − c Qmedium = {f ∈ I |there exists P ∈ X with r ≤ deg P ≤ r d m +1 d≥ [0 such that X ∩ Hf is not smooth of dimension m − 1 at P }. medium Then lim µ¯Z(Qr )=0. r→∞ RANDOM HYPERSURFACES AND EMBEDDING CURVES 7 Proof. By Lemma 3.6, we have #(Qmedium ∩ I ) r d ≤ q−(m−e)deg P + q−(m+1)deg P #Id e P ∈Ve P ∈X−V X r≤ XP ≤ d−c r≤ degXP ≤ d−c deg m+1 m+1 ≤ q−(m−e)deg P + q−(m+1)deg P . e ∈ ∈ − X P X(Ve)≥r P (X V )≥r By [LW54, Lemma 1], a k-dimensional variety hasO(qkl) closed points of degree l; applied −r to each Ve and X − V , we see as in [Poo08, Lemma 3.2] that the above expression is O(q ) as r →∞, under our assumption that dim(Ve)+ e < m for each e. 3.3. Singular Points of High Degree. Lemma 3.8 (Singularities of high degree off V ). Define high QX−V = {f ∈ Id | ∃P ∈ (X −V ) d−c s.t. X ∩Hf isn’t smooth of dimension m−1 at P }. > m+1 d≥0 [high Then µ¯Z(QX−V )=0. Proof. The proof of [Poo08, Lemma 4.2] works without change. Lemma 3.9 (Singularities of high degree on Ve). For any e such that Ve is not empty, define high QV = {f ∈ Id | ∃P ∈ (Ve) d−c s.t. X ∩ Hf isn’t smooth of dimension m − 1 at P }. e > m+1 d≥0 [ high Then µ¯Z(QVe )=0. Proof. As the union of finitely many density 0 sets will be density 0, it suffices to prove the lemma with X replaced by each of the sets in an open covering of X, so we may assume X An Pn is contained in Fq = {x0 =6 0} ⊂ , and we may dehomogenize by setting x0 = 1. This F ′ ′ F identifies Id ⊂ Sd ⊂ q[x0,...,xn] with subspaces Id ⊂ Sd ⊂ A = q[x1,...,xn]. Since V isn’t assumed smooth, we can’t take it to be locally cut out by a system of local parameters, as is done in [Poo08]. Instead, fix a closed point v ∈ Ve. Recall the exact sequence of sheaves on V [Har77, Section II.8]: 2 1 1 IV /IV → ΩX ⊗ OV → ΩV → 0. An Thus we can choose a system of local parameters t1,...,tn ∈ A at v on Fq such that tm+1 = tm+2 = ... = tn = 0 defines X locally at v, while t1,...,tm−e vanish on V . In fact, since V = X ∩ Z, we may choose t1,...,tm−e vanishing on Z. 1 n n Now dt1,...,dtn are an OAF ,v-basis for the stalk ΩA ,v. Let ∂1,...,∂n be the dual basis q Fq of the stalk TAn ,v of the tangent sheaf. Choose s ∈ A with s(v) =6 0 to clear denominators so Fq that Di = s∂i gives a global derivation A → A for i =1,...,n. Then there is a neighborhood An 1 n U of v in Fq such that U ∩{tm+1 = tm+2 = ... = tn =0} = U ∩ X, ΩU = ⊕i=1OU dti, and ∗ ′ s ∈ OU . For f ∈ Id, Hf ∩ X fails to be smooth of dimension m − 1 at a point P ∈ Ve ∩ U if and only if f(P )=(D1f)(P )= ... =(Dmf)(P ) = 0. d−τ F Let N = dim(Ve), τ = maxi{deg ti} and γ = ⌊ p ⌋, where p is the characteristic of q. ′ ′ p p Given choices of f0 ∈ Id, and gi ∈ Sγ for i =1,...N + 1, let f = f0 + g1t1 + ... + gN+1tN+1. 8 JOSEPH GUNTHER ′ By hypothesis, N + 1 = dim(Ve)+1 ≤ m − e, so we have each ti ∈ Id. Given all possible ′ choices of f0,g1,...gN+1, f realizes every element of Id the same number of times, because ′ of f0 (i.e. f is a random element of Id). This has served to make the derivatives partially independent of each other: note that for p i ≤ N + 1, Dif = Dif0 + sgi . Given choices of f0,g1,...,gi, let Wi = Ve ∩{D1f = ... = Dif = 0}, which depends only on these choices. As in [Poo04, Lemma 2.6], for 1 ≤ i ≤ N, the fraction of choices of f0,g1,...,gi such that dim(Wi) ≤ N − i goes to 1 as d → ∞. In particular, for most choices, WN is finite. Next, as in [Poo08, Lemma 4.3], given any choice of f0,g1,...,gN such that WN is finite, the fraction of choices of gN+1 such that (Ve) d−c ∩ WN+1 = ∅ goes to 1 as d → ∞. In > m+1 high conclusion (the product of two quantities that both go to 1 itself goes to 1),µ ¯Z(QVe ) = 0. Proof of Theorem 1.1. Let P = {f | X ∩ Hf is smooth of dimension m − 1}. Then we have medium high high P ⊂ Pr ⊂P∪Qr ∪ QX−V ∪ (∪eQVe ), so by the preceding results 1 µZ (P) = lim µZ(Pr)= . r→∞ ζX−V (m + 1) ζVe (m − e) e Y 4. The Probability of a Hypersurface Section Having a Given Number of Singularities Proof of Theorem 1.5. Fix a value of ℓ ≥ 1. Suppose we have r distinct closed points {P1,...,Pr} of X, of any degrees λ1,...,λr such that λi = ℓ. Then the contribution λ [ℓ] r ∞ nλi r t i of zero-cycles supported on exactly this set to ZX (t) is i=1 n=1 t = i=1 1−tλi . P −λ (m+1) Plugging in q−(m+1) gives that their contribution to ζ[ℓ](m + 1) is r q i . X Q Pi=1 1−q−λi(m+1)Q On the other hand, consider the probability that an F -hypersurface section X ∩ H of X q Q is singular at exactly the points {P1,...,Pr}. (Note that since X and H are both defined over Fq, X ∩ H is singular at a geometric point if and only if it’s singular at all of the point’s Fq-conjugates.) Let mi be the ideal sheaf of the point Pi, and let Zi be the subscheme of m2 X defined by i . Let Z = Zi. Then by Theorem 1.2 (Bertini with Taylor conditions) of [Poo04] applied to T = {0} × ... ×{0}, the probability that an Fq-hypersurface section of S X is singular at exactly the points {P1,...,Pr} is r 1 1 1 q−λi(m+1) P λ (m+1) · = · −λ (m+1) . q i i ζX−Z(m + 1) ζX (m + 1) 1 − q i i=1 Y Note that there are only finitely many such {P1,...,Pr}, as their degree is bounded by ℓ. Since our density definition of probability in Section 2 is finitely additive, the probabilities of being singular at each such set add to give the total probability in Theorem 1.5: the event of a hypersurface section being singular in precisely the points of one set is certainly disjoint from the event given by a different set of points. Meanwhile, the series contributions of each [ℓ] {P1,...,Pr} add up to all of ζX (m + 1). As the series terms and the probabilities were individually comparable, we’re done. RANDOM HYPERSURFACES AND EMBEDDING CURVES 9 References [BDFL10] Alina Bucur, Chantal David, Brooke Feigon, and Matilde Lal´ın. Fluctuations in the number of points on smooth plane curves over finite fields. J. Number Theory, 130(11):2528–2541, 2010. [BK12] Alina Bucur and Kiran S. Kedlaya. The probability that a complete intersection is smooth. J. Th´eor. Nombres Bordeaux, 24(3):541–556, 2012. [Blo71] Spencer Bloch. Algebraic cohomology classes on algebraic varieties. PhD thesis, Columbia Uni- versity, 1971. [Dwo60] Bernard Dwork. On the rationality of the zeta function of an algebraic variety. Amer. J. Math., 82:631–648, 1960. [EW15] Daniel Erman and Melanie Matchett Wood. Semiample Bertini theorems over finite fields. Duke Math. J., 164(1):1–38, 2015. [GK90] G.-M. Greuel and H. Kr¨oning. Simple singularities in positive characteristic. Math. Z., 203(2):339– 354, 1990. [Har77] Robin Hartshorne. Algebraic geometry. Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1977. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 52. [KA79] Steven L. Kleiman and Allen B. Altman. Bertini theorems for hypersurface sections containing a subscheme. Comm. Algebra, 7(8):775–790, 1979. [LW54] Serge Lang and Andr´eWeil. Number of points of varieties in finite fields. Amer. J. Math., 76:819– 827, 1954. [Ngu05] Nghi Huu Nguyen. Whitney theorems and Lefschetz pencils over finite fields. PhD thesis, Univer- sity of California at Berkeley, May 2005. [Poo04] Bjorn Poonen. Bertini theorems over finite fields. Ann. of Math. (2), 160(3):1099–1127, 2004. [Poo08] Bjorn Poonen. Smooth hypersurface sections containing a given subscheme over a finite field. Math. Res. Lett., 15(2):265–271, 2008. [Poo13] Bjorn Poonen. Extending self-maps to projective space over finite fields. Doc. Math., 18:1039– 1044, 2013. [Ser65] Jean-Pierre Serre. Zeta and L functions. In Arithmetical Algebraic Geometry (Proc. Conf. Purdue Univ., 1963), pages 82–92. Harper & Row, New York, 1965. [VW15] Ravi Vakil and Melanie Matchett Wood. Discriminants in the Grothendieck ring. Duke Math. J., 164(6):1139–1185, 2015. [Wut14] Franziska Wutz. Bertini theorems for hypersurface sections containing a subscheme over finite fields. PhD thesis, Universit¨at Regensburg, November 2014. Department of Mathematics, The Graduate Center, City University of New York (CUNY); 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10016, U.S.A. E-mail address: [email protected]